STORM-3217 and STORM-3221 have been fixed - +1 from me for 2.0 RC. On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 10:01 AM Govind Menon <gme...@oath.com> wrote:
> Hi all, > > There are some regressions that I introduced as part of STORM-1311 which > I'm working on as part of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3217 > and https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3221. These should be > fixed before a 2.x release > > I have code working on the Yahoo internal branch and should have PRs up > for them in community soon. > > I apologize for slowing things up. > > Thanks, > Govind. > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 3:31 PM Arun Mahadevan <ar...@apache.org> wrote: > >> +1 for releasing 2.0. >> >> May be the RC can be cut once critical patches are merged. >> >> On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 at 10:28, Stig Rohde Døssing <stigdoess...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > +1 to cut an RC. >> > >> > Here are a couple of PRs that could maybe go in >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2719 >> > https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2800 (this one requires some >> changes, >> > but we should be able to fix it pretty quickly) >> > also would like to get https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2805 >> reviewed, >> > it might change some public methods. >> > >> > Other than that, we should try to remove as much deprecated code as we >> can >> > before release >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2947 >> > >> > Den man. 10. sep. 2018 kl. 21.59 skrev Alexandre Vermeerbergen < >> > avermeerber...@gmail.com>: >> > >> > > +1 for an Storm 2.0 as soon as possible, let's jump into the future :) >> > > Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 à 21:50, Kishorkumar Patil >> > > <kpa...@oath.com.invalid> a écrit : >> > > > >> > > > Looking into all issues reported under epic >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2714 are >> resolved/closed. >> > I >> > > > don't see any open issues/blockers at this point for going ahead >> with >> > 2.x >> > > > release. >> > > > >> > > > I am +1 to 2.0 release. >> > > > >> > > > Regards, >> > > > -Kishor >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 2:24 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com >> > >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > I agree, and looking through the JIRAs against 2.0, I would say a >> > > majority >> > > > > of the ones marked critical are not critical. >> > > > > >> > > > > I’m +1 on moving forward with a 2.0 release, but will give others >> > time >> > > to >> > > > > respond with any JIRAs they think should be included. >> > > > > >> > > > > > p.s. I don't want to create branch-2.x or branch-2.0.x until >> > > absolutely >> > > > > > necessary, I don't see any major features with pull requests up >> but >> > > if >> > > > > you >> > > > > > do run across one please send something out before merging it >> in, >> > so >> > > we >> > > > > can >> > > > > > set up the branches properly at that time. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Agree. We can always branch off the release tag/commit. >> > > > > >> > > > > -Taylor >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > On Sep 10, 2018, at 12:25 PM, Bobby Evans <bo...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > It has been nearly a month since this was originally sent out, >> and >> > > this >> > > > > is >> > > > > > not the first of these kinds of emails to go out about a 2.0.0 >> > > release. >> > > > > I >> > > > > > think we have made a lot of really good progress on getting >> ready >> > > for a >> > > > > 2.0 >> > > > > > release, and I really would like to see it happen before another >> > > month >> > > > > > passes. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > We have a 2.0 based deploy in some of our staging clusters, >> > currently >> > > > > > following the master branch with a little that is Yahoo >> specific on >> > > top. >> > > > > We >> > > > > > would like to start pushing towards production with it soon. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > There are a few issues that we are aware of. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND% >> > > > > 20affectedVersion%20in%20(2.0.0)%20AND%20resolution%20%3D% >> > > > > 20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC >> > > > > > >> > > > > > There are no blockers still open, and only 4 issues listed as >> > > critical. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > If others have any open issues that feel need to be addressed >> prior >> > > to a >> > > > > > 2.0.0 release please respond to this with the JIRA number. I >> would >> > > like >> > > > > to >> > > > > > set a goal/tentative date of Sep 17th (one week from today) to >> put >> > > > > together >> > > > > > a release candidate for a 2.0.0 release, and unless there are >> major >> > > > > > blockers that show up I think we can do it. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Bobby Evans >> > > > > > >> > > > > > p.s. I don't want to create branch-2.x or branch-2.0.x until >> > > absolutely >> > > > > > necessary, I don't see any major features with pull requests up >> but >> > > if >> > > > > you >> > > > > > do run across one please send something out before merging it >> in, >> > so >> > > we >> > > > > can >> > > > > > set up the branches properly at that time. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:47 PM Jungtaek Lim < >> kabh...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> I'd like to say first, thanks Stig to take up remaining issues. >> > > Thanks >> > > > > to >> > > > > >> his efforts, according to the epic, we have only one major >> issue >> > > left: >> > > > > >> porting UI to Java [1], and pull request [2] is available for >> > that. >> > > > > >> There're another issues [3] [4] targeting 2.0.0 (since it is >> > > backward >> > > > > >> incompatible) but they are all about removing deprecated >> things, >> > so >> > > > > easier >> > > > > >> to be reviewed and make decisions. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Once we have a patch for that now, IMHO it would be good to >> review >> > > and >> > > > > ship >> > > > > >> in 2.0.0 if it wouldn't take a month or so. We could do some >> > sanity >> > > > > tests >> > > > > >> in parallel, so waiting for UI port would not block much time >> on >> > > > > releasing >> > > > > >> Storm 2.0.0. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1311 >> > > > > >> 2. https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2752 >> > > > > >> 3. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2947 >> > > > > >> 4. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3156 >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> 2018년 7월 11일 (수) 오전 5:12, Alexandre Vermeerbergen < >> > > > > >> avermeerber...@gmail.com>님이 >> > > > > >> 작성: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >>> +1 would love to try it when an RC is avail! >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> Alexandre Vermeerbergen >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> 2018-07-10 21:15 GMT+02:00 Arun Mahadevan <ar...@apache.org>: >> > > > > >>>> +1 to get it out soon. >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>> On 7/10/18, 11:52 AM, "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgo...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>>>> +1 Sounds good to me. >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>> -Taylor >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> On Jul 10, 2018, at 2:18 AM, Jungtaek Lim < >> kabh...@gmail.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> Hi devs, >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> I hopefully have a time to sort out issues regarding Storm >> > > 2.0.0 and >> > > > > >>> link >> > > > > >>>>>> to epic issue. >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2714 >> > > > > >>>>>> (require login to Apache JIRA to see issues in epic) >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> I guess we are close to the release, mostly left reviewing >> > some >> > > > > >> pending >> > > > > >>>>>> pull requests, and some manual sanity tests. >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> Given that master branch is relatively stabilized for >> Travis >> > CI >> > > > > >> build, >> > > > > >>> as >> > > > > >>>>>> well as style check and Java port make codebase better (at >> > > least for >> > > > > >>> me), I >> > > > > >>>>>> would really want to make Storm 2.0.0 released sooner than >> > > later, >> > > > > and >> > > > > >>> rely >> > > > > >>>>>> majorly on 2.x version line. >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> So I would propose dev folks to concentrate on remaining >> tasks >> > > for >> > > > > >>> Storm >> > > > > >>>>>> 2.0.0 till we announce release. WDYT? >> > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > >>>>>> Thanks, >> > > > > >>>>>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >> > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > >>>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> >
